CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 142 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Monday, October 26, 1998 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 9363 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, October 26, 1998 The House met at 11 a.m. Humphreys, who was instrumental in writing the special human rights declaration for the United Nations. I am sure New Bruns- _______________ wickers are proud that the stamp was issued. We are certainly proud that a New Brunswicker received international recognition Prayers for his work on human rights. _______________ In Canada, of course, we have our own human rights legislation. However I question the necessity for a fishers’ bill of rights PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BUSINESS because across this country there are many different sectors of the economy. If this House is going to try to develop bills of rights, maybe there should be one farmers. They probably deserve a bill of D (1105 ) rights because one of the first occupations on this earth was [English] agriculture. Maybe some of our friends from that sector could have a farmers’ bill of rights. We could go on and on to identify different FISHERS’ BILL OF RIGHTS groups that should certainly have rights. I think of animal rights. Maybe the member opposite should be thinking of a fish bill of The House resumed from June 4 consideration of the motion that rights. Bill C-302, an act to establish the rights of fishers including the right to be involved in the process of fisheries stock assessment, In the last 25 years fish have had a very difficult time on our fish conservation, setting of fishing quotas, fishing licensing and globe. As a very good source of protein, we find that many the public right to fish and establish the right of fishers to be emerging nations or nations in difficulty have looked upon the informed of decisions affecting fishing as a livelihood in advance waters of this earth as supplying protein for their people. As a and the right to compensation if other rights are abrogated unfairly, result, the fishing industry, and fish in particular, have been under be read the second time and referred to a committee. great stress. In the 1980s Atlantic Canada suffered great difficulties Mr. Charles Hubbard (Miramichi, Lib.): Madam Speaker, it with the decline of the groundfishery. certainly is a privilege today to join with my colleagues in the House to debate the motion of my colleague, the hon. member for My colleague from the west coast might worry about coho New Brunswick Southwest, who represents a riding that is very salmon. They too might need to have their rights protected. If we much involved with the fishery. do not have some protection for these species soon our entire economy in terms of the fishery will be in difficulty. Only about a week ago our provincial newspaper had a very lengthy article on the tremendous resource that we have in the Bay I have certain concerns with the bill in terms of this group of of Fundy. I am sure that the member, who is from that area, is very people. I know that fisher people are a very important part of our much concerned about the future and the longevity of the fishery economy. As a government we have attempted to regulate and to for all of us in Atlantic Canada. show fisher people that they have a responsibility to sustain their industry. It is curious today that we are talking about a so-called fishers’ bill of rights. If we go back, historically, we find that in the last 200 Through regulation and hopefully co-operation the various fisher years rights have been developed for a very significant group of people can work along with the Department of Fisheries and people. Oceans to ensure that our fishery has a future. I think of the original bill of rights and the work that was done by The House should also recognize that with the decline of the east the American colonists when the United States was set up as a new coast fishery and the problems on the west coast we have devel- country in this hemisphere. Then, of course, with the French oped programs to assist those areas. The fisher people who have revolution we had the declaration of the rights of man. difficulties will have an opportunity to take part in programs to get Also this week we have to reflect upon the stamp that came out assistance with training and to improve habitat, as we have done on only this past month recognizing a fellow New Brunswicker, John the west coast with the salmon fishery. 9364 COMMONS DEBATES October 26, 1998 Private Members’ Business D (1110 ) all across the country and on all coasts. However I will be talking about this bill from a west coast perspective, as the member On the east coast, as the member opposite from Halifax would opposite said that we might have concerns in this area. certainly agree, we have developed good programs to make sure that people in the fishing industry can receive some assistance The bill describes a bill of rights for fishermen. This bill has when fish become scarce. multiple rationales and essentially would be a good counter-bal- ance to the dominance of decision making on fisheries fronts by an If we look at the fishery in the great province of Newfoundland overly centralized bureaucracy that we all know as the Department we find that today the resource from the sea is bringing more of Fisheries and Oceans. This bill is not responsive enough to local money to that province than it did during the best years of the communities, to local fishermen or in fact to the recreational groundfishery. sector. We are looking at alternate species. The fishermen may develop This bill is clear in stating that people who fish for their other aspects of fishing and sales for those fish, which will enable livelihood should be involved in decisions regarding the protection, them to continue in their home communities. However, we have to development and harvesting of fish. This is good for two reasons. be concerned with what has happened to the good people on the First, the fishermen have important local knowledge of the kind we east coast and those who have encountered serious difficulties as a cannot afford to prove scientifically, but which has stood the test of result of the economy. time. Second, if we do not involve the fishermen we do not get a buy-in with new policy directions and new management proposals. We have to remember that fish have traditionally been very available. However, today we have to be concerned with the fact D (1115) that we have to sustain the fishery. It is also a primary way to develop volunteerism which is so I would suggest that the member is a bit off base in terms of critical in the development of fish stocks, whether through fish trying to develop a charter of rights for fisher people. The minister hatcheries, the development of riparian zones or developing a has brought forward a committee to look at partnerships in fishing, conservation ethic in children’s or citizen’s watch on poaching. to try to develop a co-operative venture between those who are out Any number of things contribute to the good citizen aspect of on the water and those sitting in offices trying to regulate the looking after our resources. fishery. We have to remember that fish are a public, not a private Probably the most controversial aspect of the bill deals with the resource, and the Government of Canada has a definite responsibil- right of compensation to those whose rights were taken away or ity to see it continue as a satisfactory industry. abrogated by the federal government through unilateral or actions which exclude affected fishermen. In my riding of Miramichi the first minister of marine and fisheries in the original Government of Canada in 1867 was Peter The government and DFO bureaucracy will fight this clause Mitchell. We have watched over the years what has happened with tooth and nail because it attempts to make them accountable for the fishery since the time of Peter Mitchell. We have to be decisions they make about people affected by their decisions. It is concerned with what our responsibilities are. far easier for bureaucrats or ministers to sit ensconced, buffered and unchallenged and be securely protected from the results of I know the member who brought forward this bill is concerned their decisions. These people do not have repercussions from their with his own area. He is very much involved with the area of bad policy decisions. Given a choice they would prefer not to deal southern New Brunswick. He needs to see that DFO and the fisher with people affected by their decisions because plainly it is people work co-operatively to continue the fishery there. But I uncomfortable for them. think we have to be more concerned as members of this govern- ment and people, in general, about our responsibilities to the This is the crux of the bill, the strongest part of the bill. It is an fishery so that it can continue. attempt to bring accountability to the bureaucracy. As chairman of the fisheries committee I would not support a bill Despite all this I have some concerns about the bill which I for a particular charter of rights for one particular group.